Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 12/23/2002 07:03:23 Central Standard Time,
grimmetttb@... writes:

> I've never seen a tournament where competing sides meet while in march
> formation.
>

Tim

I've played a few of those games (even did a couple back in c-springs). I'm
with you, we ought to start letting the old guard keep 1-2 tourneys a con
just the way they are and having one that is something different.

J


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Tim Grimmett]

Scott--

Another angle I'd like your perspective on.

I've never seen a tournament where competing sides meet while in march
formation.

Warrior has the mechanics; in the ten years I've been playing I've never
seen it.

Is time the factor; gauging victory (put a well in the middle of the table
and play king of the hill); scale wrong for an 8x5 table?

Tim

-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Holder [mailto:Scott.Holder@...]
Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 2:12 PM
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [WarriorRules] A interesting "fictional" angle on Romans vs
Parthians


First, I know that the Romans encountered cataphracts well before their
run-ins with the Parthians. There was a battle against the Seleucids but I
haven't had time to dig thru my books to find the specific reference. I
can't remember if this battle/engagement took place during the Punic era or
much later when Rome expanded into the Levant. Second, late late Republican
campaigns in/against Armenia could have resulted in Roman "exposure" to
cataphracts. Again, I haven't had time (too busy working on Hohenstaufen
Sicilians) to dig any deeper.

Anyway, our discussion on Carrhae dovetails nicely with a very brief blurb
in Colleen McCullough's book "The October Horse". To set the context, it's
the night before the Ides of March and Caeser is attending a small dinner
party at a friends. A number of the conspirators who would assasinate him
the next day are also present but that's not really the important point
here. They are discussing Caeser's impending campaign against......the
Parthians. Here goes:

"Now that your head is up from your papers, answer me one question," said
Dolabella. "I note you want a hundred pieces of artillery per legion for
the Parthian campaign. I know you're an ardent exponent of artilery,
Caeser, but isn't that excessive?"
"Cataphracts," said Caeser
"Cataphracts," asked Dolabella, frowning.
"Parthian cavalry," said Cassius, who had seen them in their thousands at
the Bilechas River. "Clad in chainmail from head to foot. They ride giant
horses clad in chainmail too."
"Yes, I remembered in your report to the Senate, Cassius, that you said they
couldn't charge at a full gallop, and it occurred to me that they would
suffer terribly from heavy bombardment in the early stages of a battle,"
said Caeser, looking pensive. "It may also be possible to bombard the
trains of camels bring spare arrows up to the Parthian archer cavalry. If
my ideas are wrong, I'll put however much of the artillery into storage, but
somehow I don't think I'm wrong."

Heh heh, Ms McCullough has obviously played Warrior a time or two:) I
remember a game I played against Jon during his first tour at Leavenworth,
Teutonic Knights vs Yuan. Four hours and he won 2-1. Not exactly a slug
fest. Why? I had all my double-mounted light bolt shooters sitting on a
hill in the middle of the table and he couldn't bring his knights anywhere
near them. Trying to funnel his good stuff into my schlocky (but potent)
Reg D Korean foot only went so far because again, those were the kinds of
troops designed to kill cav. In some ways, that game parallels what is
raised in the previous paragraph. To be honest, I don't know the "paper
ratio" of artillery to legions from the EIR period onward but am sure it's
out there somewhere.

One other note on Carhhae, I believe the account is that there were 7,000
cataphracts (I could have this mixed up with total number of Parthian cav
but I don't think so) facing Crassus on the campaign. When he drew up 7
legions into some form of large hollow square, that would have been close to
30,000 legionaires. As a Parthian commander, I wouldn't like those odds
even if I could pick which side I'd slam into. Works about the same in
Warrior as well.

Something like Carhhae would be an ideal 6mm game, take an entire weekend to
play it out, build a donut shaped set of tables, Roman players on the
inside, Parthian players outside. Roman players don't do much, in fact, you
could probably make this a sort of umpire driven format (akin to D&D) in
that the Romans would play the battle as close to the historical account as
possible and see what happens when they try to break into column and leave.

scott


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[scott holder]

I've played a few of those games (even did a couple back in c-springs). I'm
with you, we ought to start letting the old guard keep 1-2 tourneys a con
just the way they are and having one that is something different.

>See other email. I love "odd" tourney formats, makes the game much more inte
resting. However, at the big east shows I do, I'm pretty in tune with what th
e player base wants. Moreover, with something as complicated as Warrior, the
last thing I want a newer player to hafta deal with in a 4 hour time frame is
"learning" how to extricate himself from a march:):)

scott

[Tim Grimmett]

Jon is correct.

-----Original Message-----
From: JonCleaves@... [mailto:JonCleaves@...]
Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 3:27 PM
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] A interesting "fictional" angle on Romans vs
Parthians


yeah, but Scott, Tim was asking, I think, about a game where BOTH are
marching.

I'm with you - the one guy attacking the other guy marching won't fly.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Tim,
I remember a game when Jake, Matt, myself, and Greg all played a situation
where one side had to come in on the march while the other army lay in wait.
What a cool game that was!!!
Kelly
"Grimmett, Timothy B" <grimmetttb@...> wrote:Scott--

Another angle I'd like your perspective on.

I've never seen a tournament where competing sides meet while in march
formation.

Warrior has the mechanics; in the ten years I've been playing I've never
seen it.

Is time the factor; gauging victory (put a well in the middle of the table
and play king of the hill); scale wrong for an 8x5 table?

Tim

-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Holder [mailto:Scott.Holder@...]
Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 2:12 PM
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [WarriorRules] A interesting "fictional" angle on Romans vs
Parthians


First, I know that the Romans encountered cataphracts well before their
run-ins with the Parthians. There was a battle against the Seleucids but I
haven't had time to dig thru my books to find the specific reference. I
can't remember if this battle/engagement took place during the Punic era or
much later when Rome expanded into the Levant. Second, late late Republican
campaigns in/against Armenia could have resulted in Roman "exposure" to
cataphracts. Again, I haven't had time (too busy working on Hohenstaufen
Sicilians) to dig any deeper.

Anyway, our discussion on Carrhae dovetails nicely with a very brief blurb
in Colleen McCullough's book "The October Horse". To set the context, it's
the night before the Ides of March and Caeser is attending a small dinner
party at a friends. A number of the conspirators who would assasinate him
the next day are also present but that's not really the important point
here. They are discussing Caeser's impending campaign against......the
Parthians. Here goes:

"Now that your head is up from your papers, answer me one question," said
Dolabella. "I note you want a hundred pieces of artillery per legion for
the Parthian campaign. I know you're an ardent exponent of artilery,
Caeser, but isn't that excessive?"
"Cataphracts," said Caeser
"Cataphracts," asked Dolabella, frowning.
"Parthian cavalry," said Cassius, who had seen them in their thousands at
the Bilechas River. "Clad in chainmail from head to foot. They ride giant
horses clad in chainmail too."
"Yes, I remembered in your report to the Senate, Cassius, that you said they
couldn't charge at a full gallop, and it occurred to me that they would
suffer terribly from heavy bombardment in the early stages of a battle,"
said Caeser, looking pensive. "It may also be possible to bombard the
trains of camels bring spare arrows up to the Parthian archer cavalry. If
my ideas are wrong, I'll put however much of the artillery into storage, but
somehow I don't think I'm wrong."

Heh heh, Ms McCullough has obviously played Warrior a time or two:) I
remember a game I played against Jon during his first tour at Leavenworth,
Teutonic Knights vs Yuan. Four hours and he won 2-1. Not exactly a slug
fest. Why? I had all my double-mounted light bolt shooters sitting on a
hill in the middle of the table and he couldn't bring his knights anywhere
near them. Trying to funnel his good stuff into my schlocky (but potent)
Reg D Korean foot only went so far because again, those were the kinds of
troops designed to kill cav. In some ways, that game parallels what is
raised in the previous paragraph. To be honest, I don't know the "paper
ratio" of artillery to legions from the EIR period onward but am sure it's
out there somewhere.

One other note on Carhhae, I believe the account is that there were 7,000
cataphracts (I could have this mixed up with total number of Parthian cav
but I don't think so) facing Crassus on the campaign. When he drew up 7
legions into some form of large hollow square, that would have been close to
30,000 legionaires. As a Parthian commander, I wouldn't like those odds
even if I could pick which side I'd slam into. Works about the same in
Warrior as well.

Something like Carhhae would be an ideal 6mm game, take an entire weekend to
play it out, build a donut shaped set of tables, Roman players on the
inside, Parthian players outside. Roman players don't do much, in fact, you
could probably make this a sort of umpire driven format (akin to D&D) in
that the Romans would play the battle as close to the historical account as
possible and see what happens when they try to break into column and leave.

scott


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]